Redhat

jerry jdinardo at ix.netcom.com
Sun Jan 14 04:50:10 PST 2001


> > worth.  I did not say in my message that ALL distros are total crap--I
> > very pointedly asserted that redhat 7.0 was.  Such a buggy distro
> > actually gives Linux a bad name--it's the windows of the distro world,

I really do not understand all of the Redhat bashing. If it was not for
redhat , we would probably still be using libc5 (glibc ver 1.x). At work
I have servers that have been running redhat for years without a single
problem. These machines are typically rebooted once a year for upgrades.

Now when the machine was just upgraded , it was upgraded to redhat 6.2
with a 2.2.17 kernel. We did not use a 2.4 kernel because it was not
stable. That does not mean linux 2.4 is a piece of crap , it is just new
software. Redhat 7.0 is just new software and redhat 7.1 , 7.2 and all
other distros will be better in the future because redhat put out
7.0 so a large number of people will test it in non mission critical
situations.

Redhat also contributes more back to the linux community than any other
single entity that I know of through contributions of both code and
financial support of a great many linux hackers such as allen cox.

I like LFS more than redhat for all of the reasons other people have 
already stated but that does not take away from any of the things that
redhat , debian etc have done for the linux community.

jpd

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list